Read about buy accutane online here

Acupuncture eases chronic low back pain



| | | Bookmark and Share



May 17, 2009  
Filed under acupuncture, back pain



can help people with chronic low back feel less bothered by their symptoms and function better in their daily activities, according to the largest U.S. randomized trial of its kind, published in the May 11, 2009 Archives of Internal Medicine. But the SPINE (Stimulating Points to Investigate Needling Efficacy) trial raises questions about how the ancient practice actually works.

READ ALSO:

Compared to the group that got usual care, results were similar for all three of the SPINE trial’s groups: individualized, standardized, and simulated (without going through skin). Of the people who got any kind of , an extra one in five were functioning significantly better at the end of the seven-week treatment—and an extra one in eight were still functioning better at one year.

“This study suggests that is about as effective as other treatments for chronic back that have been found helpful,” said SPINE trial leader Daniel C. Cherkin, PhD, a senior investigator at Group Health Center for Health Studies in Seattle. “But we found that simulated , without penetrating the skin, produced as much benefit as needle —and that raises questions about how works.”

The SPINE trial included 638 adult patients at two nonprofit health plans: Group Health Cooperative in Seattle and Northern California Kaiser Permanente in Oakland. They all rated the “bothersomeness” of their chronic low back as at least a 3 on a 0-to-10 scale. None of them had received before. They were randomly assigned to one of four groups:

  • Individualized needle , involving a customized prescription for points from a diagnostician
  • Standardized needle , using a single prescription for points on the back and backs of the legs, which experts consider generally effective for chronic low back
  • Simulated on those same standardized points, mimicking needle but instead of a needle using a toothpick in a needle guide tube without penetrating the skin
  • Usual care, which is the standard medical care they would have gotten anyway—and that all patients in all groups received

Everyone in the three groups (individualized, standardized, or simulated) was treated twice a week for three weeks, and then weekly for four weeks. At eight weeks, half a year, and one year, researchers measured back-related dysfunction and how much symptoms bothered patients.

The SPINE team found that at eight weeks all three groups were functioning substantially better, while the group getting only usual care was functioning only slightly better. Dysfunction scores improved significantly more for all three groups than for the usual care group. These benefits lasted for a year, although they waned over time.

Notably, the outcomes for groups that received the needle and simulated forms of did not differ significantly. So, although effectively treated low back , that therapeutic benefit seemed to require neither tailoring needle sites to an individual patient nor inserting needles into the skin.

“We don’t know precisely why people got back pain relief from the simulated ,” said Cherkin’s co-author Karen J. Sherman, PhD, MPH, a senior investigator at Group Health Center for Health Studies. “Historically, some types of have used non-penetrating needles. Such treatments may involve physiological effects that make a clinical difference.” Or it might be all about the mind-body connection, she said: “Maybe the context in which people get treatment has effects that are more important than the mechanically induced effects.”

Western medicine does not have highly effective medical treatments for chronic back , Cherkin said. Back is the number-one reason that Americans use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), including .

The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), part of the National Institutes of Health, funded the SPINE trial.

“The findings of this research show that -like treatments, including simulated , can elicit positive responses,” said Josephine P. Briggs, MD, director of NCCAM. “This adds to the growing body of evidence that something meaningful is taking place during treatments outside of actual needling. Future research is needed to delve deeper into what is evoking these responses.”

Cherkin and Sherman’s SPINE trial co-authors were Richard A. Deyo, MD, MPH, of Oregon Health & Science University in Portland; Partap S. Khalsa, DC, PhD, of NCCAM’s Division of Extramural Research; Andrew L. Avins, MD, MPH, Luisa Hamilton, MD, and Alice Pressman, MS, of Northern California Kaiser Permanente in Oakland; William E. Barlow, PhD of Cancer Research and Biostatistics and Group Health Center for Health Studies; and Laura Ichikawa, MS, Janet H. Erro, RN, MN, Kristin Delaney, MPH, and Rene Hawkes of Group Health Center for Health Studies.

(From Group Health Centre for Health Studies)

[Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 169 No. 9, May 11, 2009]